Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for May 5th, 2013

Well Ain’t that Something: PBI coaching Judges and Attorneys on How to Set Up Nonprofits…

with 3 comments

Irony prompted this post. And that’s the PBI, the Pennsylvania Bar Institute (education branch of the Pennsylvania Bar Association — see their website) is putting out AFCC material. PBI as it turns out is running, soon (this May) its 11th annual seminar on how to set up a nonprofit, properly, that is.

You’d think certain interdisciplinary organizations would get the hint by now. Apparently they still haven’t.** I guess rules and laws of incorporation are just for the masses of common workers and plebeians who are not anointed with a superior purpose and calling to disseminate therapeutic jurisprudence and save the children of the world from high-conflict relationships (and parental alienation, etc.). I should add, allegedly saving….

By the way, “Plebeians” weren’t the slaves, they were the inbetween, and eventually they got fed up and rebelled. As that’s the class basically funding the courts, perhaps that’s who it’s going to take getting fed up, and making this stuff stop. (check out that last link or hover cursor for part of it).

(**I refer to the fact that this organization displaying a Wisconsin address and showing Wisconsin-address tax returns with the IRS — is not incorporated (as itself) to do business in Wisconsin, with the State of Wisconsin, if you catch my drift about 6525 Teton Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin…..)

The Pennsylvania Bar Institute is the educational arm of the Bar Association (whereas the Bar FOUNDATION is the charitable arm that financially supports desired programs). The PBI has a press [pause to browse link….] and appears to do a booming business with on-line publications and CLE courses. For example, here’s a new one on Custody Law (as the laws recently were revamped in PA):

Get the one book you need to skillfully represent your clients in custody cases. This book—written by some of Pennsylvania’s best family law professionals—gives practitioners at every level a comprehensive, useful resource. Plus, a detailed analysis of the new Child Custody Act, major issues of custody law and practice, and a long-term view of the future. CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION.

I just did click, and looked at the faculty. So far, I see plenty of AFCC professionals listed. In family law, membership or leadership in AFCC does matter…. In fact I looked about half of them up (have links, may post.)


Anyhow, I looked up The Pennsylvania Bar Institute after hearing that a recent ruling abolished Parent Coordinators for the State, (after publishing a three-to-four-page Rule 1915.11 about it in November 2010; go figure; starts on 2nd page, here). That’s ironic because (see inset table below) — the PBI had really helped promote Parenting Coordination by publishing prominent professionals promoting it, a practice it’s marvellous to behold in action, kind of like an inside look at the gestation of another bad idea coming from the court-connected crowd:

PARENT COORDINATORS IN PENNSYLVANIA: HANDLING HIGH-CONFLICT CUSTODY CASES.

All that work — and yet in one short Rule-Amendment, there it goes….

The “It’s Abolished” Rule is three short sentences!

Rule 1915.11-1. Elimination of Parenting Coordination.
Only judges may make decisions in child custody cases. Masters and hearing officers may make recommendations to the court. Courts shall not appoint any other individual to make decisions or recommendations or alter a custody order in child custody cases. Any order appointing a parenting coordinator shall be deemed vacated on the date this rule becomes effective. Local rules and administrative orders authorizing the appointment of parenting coordinators also shall be deemed vacated on the date this rule becomes effective.

No explanation offered. I don’t see (easily, on-line) any lead-up to what caused this. Did someone actually IN the profession get on the wrong side of a parent coordinator in (his) own divorce, and put up a stink to the judges? Are the judges getting a little touchy about their authority? I really am curious — and doubt this is the end of the issue. Too many professionals have poured too much effort into protecting (and expanding) their professions to let go that easily. If you saw who these professionals actually are, I think you’d understand that “No” doesn’t mean “No” when they’re anointed and coordinated to promote a cause….


Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: